Pharmacokinetic study of the oral fluorouracil antitumor agent S‐1 in patients with impaired renal function

Although dose reduction of S‐1 is recommended for patients with impaired renal function, dose modification for such patients has not been prospectively evaluated. The aim of the present study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic parameters of 5‐fluorouracil, 5‐chloro‐2,4 dihydroxypyridine and oteracil potassium, and to review the recommended dose modification of S‐1 in patients with renal impairment. We classified patients receiving S‐1 into 4 groups according to their renal function, as measured using the Japanese estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equation. The daily S‐1 dose was adjusted based on the patient's eGFR and body surface area. Blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analysis. A total of 33 patients were enrolled and classified into 4 groups as follows: 10 patients in cohort 1 (eGFR ≥ 80 mL/min/1.73 m²), 10 patients in cohort 2 (eGFR = 50‐79 mL/min/1.73 m²), 10 patients in cohort 3 (eGFR = 30‐49 mL/min/1.73 m²), and 3 patients in cohort 4 (eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m²). Those in cohorts 3 and 4 treated with an adjusted dose of S‐1 showed a similar area under the curve for 5‐fluorouracil (941.9 ± 275.6 and 1043.5 ± 224.8 ng/mL, respectively) compared with cohort 2 (1034.9 ± 414.3 ng/mL). Notably, while there was a statistically significant difference between cohort 1 (689.6 ± 208.8 ng/mL) and 2 (P = 0.0474) treated with an equal dose of S‐1, there was no significant difference observed in the toxicity profiles of the cohorts. In conclusion, dose adjustment of S‐1 in patients with impaired renal function using eGFR is appropriate and safe.     

The combination of oral-recombinant methioninase and azacitidine arrests a chemotherapy-resistant osteosarcoma patient-derived orthotopic xenograft mouse model

Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology - Cancers are methionine (MET) and methylation addicted, causing them to be highly sensitive to MET restriction. The present study determined the efficacy of...     

Quality of life after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized,clinical trial

Background

Controversy continues as to whether single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, with the somewhat larger incision at the umbilicus, may lead to a worse postoperative quality of life and more pain compared with the more classic 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this study was to compare single-incision and 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy from the perspective of quality of life.

An updated review on pathophysiology and management of burning mouth syndrome with endocrinological,psychological and neuropathic perspectives

Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a chronic oro‐facial pain disorder of unknown cause. It is more common in peri‐ and post‐menopausal women, and sex hormone dysregulation is believed to be an important causative factor. Psychosocial events often trigger or exacerbate symptoms, and persons with BMS appear to be predisposed towards anxiety and depression. Atrophy of small nerve fibres in the tongue epithelium has been reported, and potential neuropathic mechanisms for BMS are now widely investigated. Historically, BMS was thought to comprise endocrinological, psychosocial and neuropathic components. Neuroprotective steroids and glial cell line–derived neurotrophic factor family ligands may have pivotal roles in the peripheral mechanisms associated with atrophy of small nerve fibres. Denervation of chorda tympani nerve fibres that innervate fungiform buds leads to alternative trigeminal innervation, which results in dysgeusia and burning pain when eating hot foods. With regard to the central mechanism of BMS, depletion of neuroprotective steroids alters the brain network–related mood and pain modulation. Peripheral mechanistic studies support the use of topical clonazepam and capsaicin for the management of BMS, and some evidence supports the use of cognitive behavioural therapy. Hormone replacement therapy may address the causes of BMS, although adverse effects prevent its use as a first‐line treatment. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) may have important benefits, and well‐designed controlled studies are expected. Other treatment options to be investigated include brain stimulation and TSPO (translocator protein 18 kDa) ligands.